Does the non-union scoring system (NUSS) affect the treatment approach of non-union

Experimental Biomedical Research Pub Date : 2021-10-01 DOI:10.30714/j-ebr.2021471920

B. Karslı, S. B. Tekin, V. Kılınçoğlu

{"title":"Does the non-union scoring system (NUSS) affect the treatment approach of non-union","authors":"B. Karslı, S. B. Tekin, V. Kılınçoğlu","doi":"10.30714/j-ebr.2021471920","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Aim: To investigate the effectiveness of the non-union scoring system (NUSS) in predicting the result and in guiding the treatment by comparing the treatment methods applied to non-union patients we treat in our clinic with the treatment methods suggested by the NUSS. Methods: The study included 116 patients, who were diagnosed with long bone (femur, tibia and humerus) non-union and treated in our clinic. Of the 116 patients with non-union, 48 had femur (41.38 %), 39 had tibia (33.62%) and 29 had humerus (25%) non-union. The patient scores were calculated according to the NUSS criteria. The patients were divided into four groups according to their total scores. There were 34 patients in the first group (0-25 points), 49 patients in the second group (26-50 points), 30 patients in the third group (5175 points) and three patients in the fourth group (76-100 points). Results: Union that was achieved in 79 (68.10%) of all patients was detected in 97.05% of the patients in the first group, 83.67% in the second group, and 16.66 % in the third group. Amputation, arthroplasty and arthrodesis were applied to three patients in the fourth group. While union rate was 100 % in the femur and tibia in the first group, it was 90% in the humerus. The union rates were 85.71% in the humerus, 75% in the femur and 100% in the tibia in the second group. They were 20 % in the humerus, 15.38% in the femur and 16.66% in the tibia in the third group. The number of patients treated with the treatment proposed by the NUSS: 100% in the group 1, 83.67% in the group 2, 20% in the group 3 and 100% in the group 4. The risk of nonunion in those who were not treated according to the NUSS recommendations was 28 times higher than that of others. Conclusions: The results of our study suggest that more frequent use of the NUSS procedure in non-union treatment planning may increase treatment success. In addition, NUSS can provide information about the treatment process of non-unions.","PeriodicalId":348987,"journal":{"name":"Experimental Biomedical Research","volume":"60 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experimental Biomedical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30714/j-ebr.2021471920","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: To investigate the effectiveness of the non-union scoring system (NUSS) in predicting the result and in guiding the treatment by comparing the treatment methods applied to non-union patients we treat in our clinic with the treatment methods suggested by the NUSS. Methods: The study included 116 patients, who were diagnosed with long bone (femur, tibia and humerus) non-union and treated in our clinic. Of the 116 patients with non-union, 48 had femur (41.38 %), 39 had tibia (33.62%) and 29 had humerus (25%) non-union. The patient scores were calculated according to the NUSS criteria. The patients were divided into four groups according to their total scores. There were 34 patients in the first group (0-25 points), 49 patients in the second group (26-50 points), 30 patients in the third group (5175 points) and three patients in the fourth group (76-100 points). Results: Union that was achieved in 79 (68.10%) of all patients was detected in 97.05% of the patients in the first group, 83.67% in the second group, and 16.66 % in the third group. Amputation, arthroplasty and arthrodesis were applied to three patients in the fourth group. While union rate was 100 % in the femur and tibia in the first group, it was 90% in the humerus. The union rates were 85.71% in the humerus, 75% in the femur and 100% in the tibia in the second group. They were 20 % in the humerus, 15.38% in the femur and 16.66% in the tibia in the third group. The number of patients treated with the treatment proposed by the NUSS: 100% in the group 1, 83.67% in the group 2, 20% in the group 3 and 100% in the group 4. The risk of nonunion in those who were not treated according to the NUSS recommendations was 28 times higher than that of others. Conclusions: The results of our study suggest that more frequent use of the NUSS procedure in non-union treatment planning may increase treatment success. In addition, NUSS can provide information about the treatment process of non-unions.

查看原文本刊更多论文

骨不连评分系统(NUSS)会影响骨不连的治疗方法吗

目的:通过比较临床应用于骨不连患者的治疗方法与骨不连评分系统建议的治疗方法，探讨骨不连评分系统(NUSS)在预测预后和指导治疗方面的有效性。方法:116例经诊断为长骨(股骨、胫骨、肱骨)不连的患者在我院就诊。116例骨不连患者中，48例股骨骨不连(41.38%)，39例胫骨骨不连(33.62%)，29例肱骨不连(25%)。根据NUSS评分标准计算患者评分。根据患者的总分分为四组。第一组34例(0 ~ 25分)，第二组49例(26 ~ 50分)，第三组30例(5175分)，第四组3例(76 ~ 100分)。结果:79例(68.10%)患者达到愈合，第一组97.05%，第二组83.67%，第三组16.66%。第四组3例患者行截肢、关节置换术和关节融合术。第一组股骨和胫骨愈合率为100%，肱骨愈合率为90%。第二组肱骨愈合率85.71%，股骨愈合率75%，胫骨愈合率100%。第三组肱骨占20%，股骨占15.38%，胫骨占16.66%。采用NUSS方案治疗的患者数:1组100%，2组83.67%，3组20%，4组100%。未按照NUSS建议治疗的患者发生骨不连的风险是其他患者的28倍。结论:我们的研究结果表明，在骨不连治疗计划中更频繁地使用NUSS手术可能会增加治疗成功率。此外，NUSS可以提供有关骨不连治疗过程的信息。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Experimental Biomedical Research

自引率

0.00%

发文量